I've never had to deal with such a lagging and unresponsive insurance company in my life. My area (Northern California) has one or two major snowstorms during the winter. When this happens, hundreds of trees fall. It turns our town into a disaster area, with downed trees everywhere knocking out power lines and causing serious damage. One year, we were out of power for two weeks.
On February 17th, we had one of these snowstorms. We woke up to a massive amount of snow on the ground. While I was pouring my morning coffee, we were met with a terrifying, house shaking crash. A very large tree fell and made its way into our garage. Thankfully, it wasn't the house.
My wife called our insurance company within a couple of hours. They sent an adjuster out a few days later, and a roofing company the week after, and then nothing for weeks.
About a month ago, we finally heard from them, but only to ask for photographs from the day it happened. The adjuster had a full photography rig and took photos for an hour, so I do not understand why this was necessary.
A little over two weeks ago, we received an email from a tree company stating, “A crew has been assigned to your home. We will reach out when we have an estimated time of arrival.” I called immediately to find out when, and was told no one is actually coming out. They were assigned to review photographs to determine why the tree fell.
My wife called the agent on March 31st and was put on hold for an extended period of time and eventually had to hang up to go to work. She called again the next morning and left a message. I then sent an email that Friday. We finally heard back from him on April 10th (in response to my email), stating they're still reviewing how the tree fell.
So here’s the kicker: when we originally called, the agent stated that this was probably not something to worry about in our case, but that the insurance company does not cover damage caused by wind. I think they're trying their hardest to claim that the tree fell because of wind and not the massive amount of weight from the snow that accumulated in a very short period of time.
I'm no arborist, but I do know that typically a tree felled by wind will uproot, while a tree felled by snow will snap. The tree did not uproot at all; it snapped cleanly at the base.
I was in and out all day, shoveling, gassing up the generator (we didn't have power, of course), and generally hanging out on our porch. My wife and I love to bundle up and watch the snow. It was calm, quiet, and beautiful, with very little to no wind.
If they try to deny this claim by blaming it on wind, is there any recourse? Also, since then, we've had a couple of weeks of heavy rainstorms, which have, of course, caused more internal damage due to their lack of action. I did file a report with the California Department of Insurance, since they are well outside the 40 days required by California law.
Tree crashed into our garage during a snowstorm. Insurance has done almost nothing for 2 months.
byu/oCUBBYo inInsurance
Posted by oCUBBYo
3 Comments
I’ve seen many trees felled by wind that broke at the base and didn’t uproot. The fact that the ground would likely have been frozen during this only makes that seem more plausible.
I cannot however, remember having an entire tree that broke at the base due to snow. Branches? Of course, breaking higher up where the branch density is higher, sure. That doesn’t mean I’ve seen it all, but my instincts would definitely believe wind is the more likely cause here.
Also you have a duty to protect your property from further damage, the fact that the tree has been on your roof for 40 days, and damage is worsening because you didn’t take action to protect your home, can be used to deny the additional damages (assuming the initial loss is covered). This duty exists outside of and is not dependent on coverage.
Your options are, wait for them to make their decision and hope it goes your way. If it doesn’t, accept it and move forward as you see for.
Or you can then either get a lawyer or maybe a PA to try and fight the decision.
My adjuster did similar when a tree fell on my house. They took a few months to take liability and to determine scope. It took another 6 months to expand the scope and another month or so for pricing to be approved as it greatly increased. Right into the winter season, with no roof and half my house missing. Fun fun 🙂
>the insurance company does not cover damage caused by wind.
What!
The two basic coverages in any property insurance policy are fire and wind.
In almost two months have you opened up your policy and READ it to find out if there was no wind coverage?
And if there is no wind coverage, did you not know that when you bought the policy?
Anyway, go to [Local Weather Forecast, News and Conditions | Weather Underground](https://www.wunderground.com/) put in your city, click on history and check Feb 17 for wind speed and gusts. Post the results.